Bill Shorten
has been adjusting to his new role in Federal Parliament with a hesitancy that shows he knows how dangerous it is.

The political ghosts of countless failed opposition leaders haunt the place where Shorten now sits.

But after just a handful of days in the job, Shorten has faced an early test and taken an early risk in an area of policy in which the political stakes are high.

Shorten has chosen to open a gap between himself and Prime Minister
Tony Abbott
on one of the few issues on which the major party leaders normally are in lockstep – national security.

Shorten responded to a statement to parliament by Abbott about the problematic issue of Australia’s tapping of the phones of the top leadership of Indonesia by suggesting that Abbott might adopt, as a means of defusing the criticism, the
Barack Obama
approach.

Related Quotes

Company Profile

Regret over leak

Abbott had just made it clear that, while he regretted the leaking of details of Australia’s secret surveillance of the phone conversations of the Indonesian leadership, he was not going to ­apologise for sticking rigidly to the long-standing policy of successive governments of maintaining absolute secrecy about intelligence matters.

Although he couched his response carefully, agreeing with Abbott on the importance of the relationship with Indonesia and offering to “unite behind" the government to repair it, Shorten added: “I believe, for instance, that the example of the United States and the way that it handled a similar issue with Germany provides the opportunity for us to consider the same course of action."

Shorten didn’t elaborate. He didn’t need to. His intention was clear – to urge Abbott to pick up the phone, call the Indonesian president and assure him that Australia “is not and will not" (Obama’s words to
Angela ­Merkel
) monitor his personal telephone conversations.

Given that the tapping of President
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
’s phone occurred during the period of the Labor government, and given that both Labor prime ministers (Rudd and Gillard) unquestioningly embraced the secrecy doctrine which governs intelligence matters, this was a significant departure by Shorten.

But while Shorten showed he is no Gillard or Rudd, Abbott is no Obama.

No apologies for intelligence gathering

Abbott is a true conservative in every political meaning of the word and to expect him to follow the Obama example would be naive.

When independent MP
Bob Katter
made a typically “ordinary man" observation that Australia would surely be outraged if it had been Indonesia tapping the phones of Abbott and his wife, Abbott dug in even deeper, at the risk of compounding the problem

“I don’t believe we should be required to apologise for reasonable intelligence-gathering operations."

Abbott clearly thinks that Indonesia will ultimately judge that the bilateral relationship is too important and let the storm blow out.

Shorten has made it harder for Abbott to hold out against Indonesia’s demands for reassurance. It’s a position for which he can expect to attract heated criticism.